Multi-domain US–China competition: military, tech, economic, and resource fronts

In 2026, the strategic rivalry between the United States and China has intensified across multiple domains—military, technological, economic, and resource frontiers—reshaping the global balance of power and introducing unprecedented risks of escalation.

Military and Frontier Domain Competition

Beijing and Washington are engaged in a high-stakes contest over influence in frontier areas such as space, the Arctic, and undersea domains:

• Space: China has made significant strides in developing anti-satellite (ASAT) systems, lunar exploration, and satellite constellations. Its expanding space infrastructure aims to establish a lunar presence and improve space situational awareness, challenging U.S. dominance. The proliferation of space assets, coupled with increasing space debris, raises the risk of miscalculations and conflicts over space sovereignty.

• Arctic: Melting ice has opened new shipping lanes and resource reserves, prompting China to invest in icebreakers, scientific stations, and infrastructure projects. Beijing’s ambition is to secure access to Arctic shipping routes and resources, contesting Western influence and reshaping Arctic governance. Recent deployments and infrastructure investments signal Beijing’s desire to shape regional dynamics.

• Undersea: China’s expanding submarine fleet and control over undersea communication cables threaten U.S. naval supremacy, especially in the South China Sea. Increased submarine patrols and seabed claims heighten risks of accidental clashes and strategic misperception, making undersea stability a critical concern.

Technological Competition and Dual-Use Advances

The technological race centers on AI, semiconductors, hypersonic weapons, and autonomous systems:

• Artificial Intelligence (AI): China is aggressively developing self-sufficient AI systems, integrating autonomous platforms into military and civilian sectors, aiming for strategic resilience amid U.S. export restrictions. The U.S. counteracts by tightening export controls and shaping international standards to maintain technological superiority. China's "AI War Plan" emphasizes militarizing AI to gain a decisive edge.

• Semiconductors: The U.S. continues to bolster domestic chip manufacturing through legislation like the CHIPS Act, seeking to decouple from Chinese supply chains. China responds with rapid advancements in its semiconductor industry, striving for self-sufficiency despite tightening export restrictions. This decoupling risks fragmenting global supply chains and triggering economic instability.

• Hypersonic Weapons: China’s successful tests of maneuverable hypersonic glide vehicles demonstrate its ability to neutralize missile defenses and project long-range strike capabilities. Russia also invests heavily in hypersonic and nuclear modernization efforts, aiming to bolster deterrence and second-strike resilience.

• Cyber and Autonomous Systems: Beijing’s investments in cyber espionage, satellite technology, and autonomous military systems blur civilian-military boundaries, complicating norms for responsible conduct and increasing escalation risks.

Control of Critical Resources and Supply Chain Realignment

Access to rare earth elements, critical minerals, and energy resources remains a pivotal battleground:

• China’s dominance over rare earths grants it leverage in electronics and military hardware. Premier Li Qiang’s inspections highlight Beijing’s focus on securing these materials.

• Global shifts are occurring as Middle Eastern nations like Saudi Arabia, the UAE, and Oman pivot towards critical minerals like lithium, cobalt, and nickel, seeking to diversify supply chains and increase resource sovereignty. Indonesia’s control over nickel exports and Malaysia’s efforts to develop semiconductor manufacturing exemplify this trend.

• Port and infrastructure disputes—such as the seizure of key ports in Panama from Chinese-linked conglomerates—illustrate the contest over maritime trade routes and strategic footholds.

Geopolitical and Diplomatic Dimensions

Diplomatic influence campaigns are integral to the rivalry:

• China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) continues to expand into Latin America, Africa, and Europe, despite concerns over debt diplomacy and sovereignty. Recent port seizures in Panama underscore efforts to control maritime infrastructure.

• European powers, notably Germany, face strategic dilemmas: balancing security commitments to the U.S. and economic ties with China. Germany’s internal debates reflect broader European indecision in this rivalry.

• Middle powers like South Korea, Britain, and Canada are navigating a complex landscape, hedging their strategies amid US–China tensions. For example, South Korea is weighing its position as U.S.-China rivalry deepens, balancing economic interests against security concerns.

Policy Responses and Norm Development

In response to this multi-domain competition, Western policymakers are advancing measures such as:

• Industrial subsidies and legislation like the CHIPS Act to bolster domestic technological capabilities.

• Export controls aiming to restrict Chinese access to critical technologies, especially in AI and semiconductors.

• Erosion of arms control treaties: The expiry of agreements like New START erodes strategic stability, while calls increase for norms governing emerging domains such as AI, space, and cyber.

• Diplomatic efforts to establish norms and confidence-building measures to prevent misunderstandings and accidental escalation amid the proliferation of dual-use technologies.

Emerging Risks and Future Outlook

The escalation across military, technological, and resource domains raises the specter of miscalculation. The development and deployment of hypersonic weapons, autonomous systems, and space assets occur in an environment lacking comprehensive international norms, amplifying the risk of conflict.

The contest over frontier domains like the Arctic and undersea areas could ignite crises over sovereignty and access, while resource competition may lead to strategic resource struggles that destabilize global markets.

In conclusion, the US–China rivalry in 2026 is characterized by relentless competition across multiple fronts—military, technological, and resource-driven. Both superpowers are investing heavily in frontier domains and dual-use technologies, seeking strategic dominance. Without robust international norms, treaties, and cooperative frameworks, this competition risks spiraling into conflict, threatening global stability and future peace. The decisions made now will determine whether the world steers toward managed competition and stability or descends into a new era of strategic confrontation and uncertainty.